1996-10-11 - Re: Why not PGP?

Header Data

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
To: Adam Back <frantz@netcom.com
Message Hash: 0274d8651f70f8679d66a67bdb6c434d38bba48bfd22728c72004d2af0f207fb
Message ID: <199610111648.JAA20799@mail.pacifier.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-11 16:48:38 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 09:48:38 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 09:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
To: Adam Back <frantz@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Why not PGP?
Message-ID: <199610111648.JAA20799@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 08:49 AM 10/11/96 +0100, Adam Back wrote:
>- what they care to enforce
>
>  NCSA Mosaic had a PGP signature checking hook, they were told to
>  take it out.  Microsoft's CAPI arrangement is that they will not
>  sign non-US CAPI compliant crypto modules (Examples of enforcement of
>  no-hooks interpretation).

Does that fix the "export only the signature" problem (for the 
government)/opportunity (for the rest of us)?   You know, present Microsoft 
with the software, don't tell them it's already out of the US, and they sign 
it.  Export the signature only  (who cares if this is legal!) and edit the 
international software to contain the signature.


Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com





Thread